Search

Algorithmic decision-making and other types of artificial intelligence (AI) can be used to predict who will commit crime, who will be a good employee, who will default on a loan, etc. However, algorithmic decision-making can also threaten human rights, such as the right to non-discrimination. The paper evaluates current legal protection in Europe against discriminatory algorithmic decisions. The paper shows that non-discrimination law, in particular through the concept of indirect discrimination, prohibits many types of algorithmic discrimination. Data protection law could also help to defend people against discrimination. Proper enforcement of non-discrimination law and data protection law could help to protect people. However, the paper shows that both legal instruments have severe weaknesses when applied to artificial intelligence. The paper suggests how enforcement of current rules can be improved. The paper also explores whether additional rules are needed. The paper argues for sector-specific – rather than general – rules, and outlines an approach to regulate algorithmic decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper proposes a fully automatic algorithm approach to map burned areas from remote sensing characterized by human interpretable mapping criteria and explainable results. This approach is partially knowledge-driven and partially data-driven. It exploits active fire points to train the fusion function of factors deemed influential in determining the evidence of burned conditions from reflectance values of multispectral Sentinel-2 (S2) data. The fusion function is used to compute a map of seeds (burned pixels) that are adaptively expanded by applying a Region Growing (RG) algorithm to generate the final burned area map. The fusion function is an Ordered Weighted Averaging (OWA) operator, learnt through the application of a machine learning (ML) algorithm from a set of highly reliable fire points. Its semantics are characterized by two measures, the degrees of pessimism/optimism and democracy/monarchy. The former allows the prediction of the results of the fusion as affected by more false positives (commission errors) than false negatives (omission errors) in the case of pessimism, or vice versa; the latter foresees if there are only a few highly influential factors or many low influential ones that determine the result. The prediction on the degree of pessimism/optimism allows the expansion of the seeds to be appropriately tuned by selecting the most suited growing layer for the RG algorithm thus adapting the algorithm to the context. The paper illustrates the application of the automatic method in four study areas in southern Europe to map burned areas for the 2017 fire season. Thematic accuracy at each site was assessed by comparison to reference perimeters to prove the adaptability of the approach to the context; estimated average accuracy metrics are omission error = 0.057, commission error = 0.068, Dice coefficient = 0.94 and relative bias = 0.0046. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Trustworthy medical AI requires transparency about the development and testing of underlying algorithms to identify biases and communicate potential risks of harm. Abundant guidance exists on how to achieve transparency for medical AI products, but it is unclear whether publicly available information adequately informs about their risks. To assess this, we retrieved public documentation on the 14 available CE-certified AI-based radiology products of the II b risk category in the EU from vendor websites, scientific publications, and the European EUDAMED database. Using a self-designed survey, we reported on their development, validation, ethical considerations, and deployment caveats, according to trustworthy AI guidelines. We scored each question with either 0, 0.5, or 1, to rate if the required information was "unavailable", "partially available," or "fully available." The transparency of each product was calculated relative to all 55 questions. Transparency scores ranged from 6.4% to 60.9%, with a median of 29.1%. Major transparency gaps included missing documentation on training data, ethical considerations, and limitations for deployment. Ethical aspects like consent, safety monitoring, and GDPR-compliance were rarely documented. Furthermore, deployment caveats for different demographics and medical settings were scarce. In conclusion, public documentation of authorized medical AI products in Europe lacks sufficient public transparency to inform about safety and risks. We call on lawmakers and regulators to establish legally mandated requirements for public and substantive transparency to fulfill the promise of trustworthy AI for health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Upper extremity function (UEF) is often compromised in multiple sclerosis (MS), although its importance is regularly underrecognized relative to ambulation. We explored the concurrent presence of impairment in UEF and ambulation by examining various aspects of UEF across different levels of ambulation. METHODS: The cohort consisted of 247 patients with clinically definite MS or clinically isolated syndrome according to the revised 2010 McDonald criteria. The Nine-Hole Peg Test and the Expanded Disability Status Scale were used to stratify patients into clinically different subgroups. For UEF, cerebellar function (finger-to-nose test), pyramidal function (pronator drift test), and the ability to perform a task of activities of daily living (drinking- from-cup test) were examined. Patient-reported limitations of UEF in daily life were assessed using the Arm Function in Multiple Sclerosis Questionnaire. RESULTS: Patients in more severely impaired ambulation groups displayed poorer performance on all UEF measures. Although most patients had normal to mild (n = 147) or moderate (n = 46) ambulatory impairment, 87.7% exhibited some level of UEF impairment as defined using the Nine-Hole Peg Test. Most patients had mild UEF impairment (n = 174), accounting for the largest proportion in all ambulation groups (51.9%-77.8%). CONCLUSIONS: A distinct pattern of impairment was found for ambulation and multiple aspects of UEF. Independent assessment of multiple aspects of disability may be helpful in treatment decision-making and could support the development of rehabilitation strategies that specifically target UEF impairment [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Growing numbers of asylum seekers across Europe have created heightened pressure on governments to employ technologies to assist immigration systems in meeting humanitarian standards of international law. This article analyses the potential of hybrid intelligence (HI)—a machine learning (ML) utility supervised by and supervising human intelligence—for assisting both asylum seekers and immigration officers in performing fair and just assessments, while addressing theoretical underpinnings of what hybridity entails from the perspective of stakeholders and humanitarian systems. While aspects of ML demonstrate promise in reducing bias in immigration decisions, such technology itself suffers from various inherent biases. In addition, technological mediation poses several unforeseen, unintended, and subtle threats to humanitarian missions. By analysing ML algorithms currently employed in refugee status determination pilot programs and immigration control, this article synthesizes universal complications of using assistive technology in Refugee Status Determinations, with special focus on evaluating resultant theoretical refugee identity reconfigurations. Conceptually, this article expands on the theoretical model of what has been termed 'ID entity' by biometrics researchers and ethnographers by analysing potential latent consequences from technological mediation in asylum cases, while addressing use cases such as German and Canadian immigration services' pilot programs, along with automated pilot border screening projects such as Iborderctrl, among others. In addition, several hypothetical scenarios are presented to concretize and further theoretical inquiry of using HI in asylum seeker interviews, with special focus on the requisite criterion of possessing a well-founded fear of persecution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To develop and validate models based on logistic regression and artificial intelligence for prognostic prediction of molar survival in periodontally affected patients. Materials and Methods: Clinical and radiographic data from four different centres across four continents (two in Europe, one in the United States, and one in China) including 515 patients and 3157 molars were collected and used to train and test different types of machine‐learning algorithms for their prognostic ability of molar loss over 10 years. The following models were trained: logistic regression, support vector machine, K‐nearest neighbours, decision tree, random forest, artificial neural network, gradient boosting, and naive Bayes. In addition, different models were aggregated by means of the ensembled stacking method. The primary outcome of the study was related to the prediction of overall molar loss (MLO) in patients after active periodontal treatment. Results: The general performance in the external validation settings (aggregating three cohorts) revealed that the ensembled model, which combined neural network and logistic regression, showed the best performance among the different models for the prediction of MLO with an area under the curve (AUC) = 0.726. The neural network model showed the best AUC of 0.724 for the prediction of periodontitis‐related molar loss. In addition, the ensembled model showed the best calibration performance. Conclusions: Through a multi‐centre collaboration, both prognostic models for the prediction of molar loss were developed and externally validated. The ensembled model showed the best performance in terms of both discrimination and validation, and it is made freely available to clinicians for widespread use in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The past two decades have witnessed an increase in ethnicity-related peer aggression, driven by the intensification of the migration phenomenon and rise of information and communication technologies. The goal of the current study is to extend the scope of previous reviews on peer aggression to examine the emerging evidence on the role of technological tools in the prevention, detection, and handling of ethnicity-related peer aggression among young people. We have identified 14 relevant papers published between 2005 and 2020 that help us answer the following research questions: What forms of aggression among young ethnic minorities do these technological interventions try to address? What types of technological interventions are being used? The results indicate that the technological tools are being used to tackle both intergroup as well as intragroup peer aggression, in which ethnic minorities youth is involved (as a victim, perpetrator or bystander). Most studies have focused on adolescents and young adults in the US or in Europe. The technological tools reported on, include: online games, videos, social media, and chat-based programmes, or machine learning algorithms aimed at tackling online and offline peer aggression. They can be used either as stand - alone tools, or as part of intervention programmes (at the school, family or community level). These findings can be useful to improve and elaborate future digital technologies developed to address ethnicity-related peer aggression. • The review maps the existing literature on the role of technological tools in tackling ethnicity-related peer aggression. • All forms of peer aggression are considered in which ethnic minorities youth was involved. • Three groups of technological interventions are identified and categorized into intra- or intergroup ethnicity-related peer aggression. • The digital tools presented include: online games, video, social media, chat-based programmes, and machine learning algorithms. • Our study reveals some follow-up research questions needed to expand current knowledge on digital technologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Digitization in transplantation is not a new phenomenon. Algorithms are being used, for example, to allocate organs based on medical compatibility and priority criteria. However, digitization is accelerating as computer scientists and physicians increasingly develop and use machine learning (ML) models to obtain better predictions on the chances of a successful transplant. The objective of the article is to shed light on the potential threats to equitable access to organs allocated through algorithms, whether these are the consequence of political choices made upstream of digitization or of the algorithmic design, or are produced by self-learning algorithms. The article shows that achieving equitable access requires an overall vision of the algorithmic development process and that European legal norms only partially contribute to preventing harm and addressing equality in access to organs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]